Pick and Adapt: An Iterative Approach for Source-Free Domain Adaptation
Ronghang Zhu, Xiang Yu, Weiming Zhuang, Lingjuan Lyu, Sheng Li
OpenReview ground truth
Abstract
Domain adaptation plays a pivotal role in deploying models when inference data distribution is different from the training data. It becomes particularly challenging in source-free domain adaptation (SFDA) scenarios, where access to the source domain data is restricted due to data privacy concern. To tackle such cases, existing approaches often resort to generating source-like data for standard unsupervised domain adaptation or endeavor to fine-tune a model pre-trained on a source domain using self-supervised training techniques. Instead, our approach strikes a different path by theoretically analyzing into an empirical risk bound for SFDA. We identify the population risk and domain drift as the major factors from the risk bound. Subsequently, we introduce a top-k importance sampling to purify the pseudo labeling and thus reduce the population risk. We further present a nearest neighbor voting based semantic domain alignment to mitigate the domain drift. An iterative optimization is finally proposed to combine the above two steps for multiple rounds. Extensive experiments across three widely applied domain adaptation datasets, i.e., Office-Home, DomainNet, and VisDA-C, demonstrate the consistently advantageous performance over the state-of-the-art methods.
Author context
Most prolific author: 11 submissions (credibility 0.92).
Delta if applied: -0.1 percentile
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 30 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 55% of matchups.
- ▲ beat Learning to ignore: Single Source Domain G… ×6
- ▼ lost to A Hard-to-Beat Baseline for Training-free … ×6
- ▲ beat LegoNet: Piecing Together and Breaking Apa… ×4
- ▼ lost to GateLoop: Fully Data-Controlled Linear Rec… ×4
- ▼ lost to FEATHER: Lifelong Test-Time Adaptation wit… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 30)